Appeal of L. A. Thompson Scenic Railway

2 B.T.A. 664
CourtUnited States Board of Tax Appeals
DecidedSeptember 28, 1925
DocketDocket No. 3477
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 2 B.T.A. 664 (Appeal of L. A. Thompson Scenic Railway) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Board of Tax Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Appeal of L. A. Thompson Scenic Railway, 2 B.T.A. 664 (bta 1925).

Opinion

[665]*665OPINION.

Marquette:

Our decision is controlled by that in Appeal of Pan-American Hide Co., 1 B. T. A. 1249. The taxpayer endeavors to distinguish this appeal for the reason that the failure of the taxpayer to carry insurance was involuntary, as no company would assume the risk. The distinction is not fundamental.

It may be conservative accounting to set aside a portion of the income to a fund out of which a fire may be provided against in advance, but deductions permitted by the law in determining the taxable net income present a quite different question. The amount of the reserve does not constitute an ordinary and necessary business expense and is therefore not deductible. Appeal of William J. Ostheimer, 1 B. T. A. 18; Appeal of Consolidated Asphalt Co., 1 B. T. A. 79; Appeal of Uvalde Co., 1 B. T. A. 932.

Arundell not participating.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

CONSUMERS OIL CORP. OF TRENTON NJ v. United States
188 F. Supp. 796 (D. New Jersey, 1960)
L. A. Thompson S. R. Co. v. Commissioner
2 B.T.A. 664 (Board of Tax Appeals, 1925)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2 B.T.A. 664, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/appeal-of-l-a-thompson-scenic-railway-bta-1925.